Semi Auto Rifles contd

Cass

BSA International wrote: »

So the "we" in Ireland you refer to are self appointed?

An ex-chair, and a range operator got together, formed the sc and claimed to represent shooting sports. As self appointed as on can get.

You have no/few actual members apart from the "we" you refer to?

The sc had two RFDs, a range operator (was also one of the RFDs, and the ex-chair of another shooting group. Yet they claimed to represent all shooting sports.

How did you convince DOJ that you and the "we" mentioned represent anyone?

How did, and still does, the sc do this considering their record. More importantly how does the other shooting bodies sit across any table for these without asking how they have the cheek to make the claim they represent shooting sports with their history?

BSA International

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Has been answerd for you in the next posts.

Sure you can "join" FUN ,and the "dude in Poland Tomaz Stephen is the president of the organisation.,if you went and persued the web pages it would be pretty explanatory on how this works...but hey,if you want big posh offices and nice ID cards and organised structures with committees and people wasting your membership due and not really doing their job....And seemingly are more intent on knee bending than actually fighting the members corner...

We are not "self-appointed" We have the franchise of the organisation for Ireland So we can hardly be self-appointed. From small acorns an all that.






It was pretty simple really,a couple of emails and phone calls, wanting to discuss legislation on a segment of firearms that affect some Irish gun owners that for some the " Big organisations" Either never got the memo for, ignored totally,[ or WERE ignored by the DOJ], weren't interested in, couldn't be arsed in representing,or some other reason had zero information on and for whatever reasons ignored multiple requests from concerned owners of these firearms on info and updates on this.

I guess some orgs talk good fights and others actually go and do their job.

We must be doing something right then as we have all this huffing and puffing about not being a recognised organisation with no mandate with no fancy offices and all that usual Irish "trying to put down the new competition" tactics... Did SC /NASRPC have an immediate mandate and spring fully formed from Zeuse's head whenever they were formed?

But the simple fact is FUNI did it, and your lot didn't in this case. So maybe you have to up your game abit?:)

Seriously? Yet another few individuals with a lot of neck passing themselves off as representing "shooters". Oh ffs !

Cass

BSA International wrote: »

Seriously? Yet another few individuals with a lot of neck passing themselves off as representing "shooters". Oh ffs !

The sc, huh! Seeking bans on shooting sports then claiming to represent them.

Grizzly 45

BSA International wrote: »

Of FUNI? If so how, considering what Grizzly said earlier?

He is a member of Firearms United Network[FUN]. We are Firearms United Network Ireland[FUNI] which is a national branch of the organisation that is based and incorporated in Poland. So no FUNI doesn't issue any cards or take membership dues.

https://www.gunsweek.com/en/current/news/firearms-united-network-opens-individual-membership-applications

BSA International

Cass wrote: »

An ex-chair, and a range operator got together, formed the sc and claimed to represent shooting sports. As self appointed as on can get.


The sc had two RFDs, a range operator (was also one of the RFDs, and the ex-chair of another shooting group. Yet they claimed to represent all shooting sports.


How did, and still does, the sc do this considering their record. More importantly how does the other shooting bodies sit across any table for these without asking how they have the cheek to make the claim they represent shooting sports with their history?

Wasn't SC a bigger group including NARGC in the beginning?

And now it seems we can add FUNI to the same list as SC?

tudderone

BSA International wrote: »

Seriously? Yet another few individuals with a lot of neck passing themselves off as representing "shooters". Oh ffs !

Whats your connection to SCOVI ? Two people join here, have a handful of posts between them and out of the blue, after four years since the SCOVI solo-runs to the DOJ/minister, there is a sudden and baffling interest in SCOVI.

Personally i thought and hoped SCOVI had been purged from Irish shooting like puss from a wound.

BSA International

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

He is a member of Firearms United Network[FUN]. We are Firearms United Network Ireland[FUNI] which is a national branch of the organisation that is based and incorporated in Poland. So no FUNI doesn't issue any cards or take membership dues.

https://www.gunsweek.com/en/current/news/firearms-united-network-opens-individual-membership-applications

Ah here! Just what we need another group claiming to represent me.

BSA International

tudderone wrote: »

Whats your connection to SCOVI ? Two people join here, have a handful of posts between them and out of the blue, after four years since the SCOVI solo-runs to the DOJ/minister, there is a sudden and baffling interest in SCOVI.

Personally i thought and hoped SCOVI had been purged from Irish shooting like puss from a wound.

Some of us read more than we post.

The only shooting body I am or ever have been a member of is NARGC.

SCOVI and FUNI are of same ilk.

Cass

BSA International wrote: »

Wasn't SC a bigger group including NARGC in the beginning?

Not at the start, later on, then not again, and recently yes. If that seems confusing, you're not alone. Groups joined then left on a yearly basis. The same groups.

And now it seems we can add FUNI to the same list as SC?

Which list is that?

Cass

BSA International wrote: »

Ah here! Just what we need another group claiming to represent me.

Just like the sc, except FUNI hasn't sought any bans to shooting sports that i know off, unlike the sc.

Cass

By the by i'm not a member, representative nor affiliate of any of the above named groups so have no horse in this race.

My opinions are based on past and current action and so far sc are batting negative three and counting.

BSA International

Cass wrote: »

Which list is that?

Few individuals, with no realistic mandate from the majority of shooters, talking to DOJ as if they have.

Cass

One last thing, this "debate" was put to bed some 4 years ago, but as always someone has to drag up some old crap, rewrite history through ignorance or naivety, and we get all this "your bad", "no your bad" nonsense.

The sc has done nothing for shooting sports and even has the proposals they submitted, on their own initiative and without consultation with other established shooting groups, which sought to weaken and even destroy whole disciplines of shooting sports, on their website. In what reality can anyone claim them to be a representative of shooting sports with a history like that and in what realm do the people that make up sc think anything they have done is noteworthy or for the betterment of shooting sports?

Thats a serious question btw? Does anyone involved actually think that seeking a cap on licenses, a ban on semi-autos, a FURTHER reduction to pistol shooter numbers and a ban on night time shooting benefits the shooting community and if so why? I would genuinely love to get some feedback on these questions but the "representative" above, smmember20, who only answer questions s/he wants to and ignores the ones they cannot/don't want to, is unwilling or unable. I mean saying these things did not happen when the sc have it on THEIR website is laughable.

Cass

BSA International wrote: »

Few individuals, with no realistic mandate from the majority of shooters, talking to DOJ as if they have.

Suppose they all have to start somewhere. I don't criticise them for how they start, even the sc, its their actions i judge. If FUNI makes any recommendations or secret proposals to have certain types of guns banned or destroy whole sections of shooting sports then you can bet your shirt i'll be asking them the same pointed questions i did to the sc representatives only this time with the hope of getting an answer.

Grizzly 45

BSA International wrote: »

Wasn't SC a bigger group including NARGC in the beginning?

SC was an umbrella group, and within a year or so,a perfect example of why umbrella organisations fail and will fail dismally here in Ireland. Or anywhere else for that matter.Once egos, personalities, agendas and money clash.

Wouldnt want to be associated with that sort of messing about.

BSA International

I was following this thread and FUNI came up and I asked for and got the info I looked for so thanks for that.

Back to browsing for me. Got a good laugh that my posts lead some to think I'm in/a supporter of SCOVI.

Cass

BSA International wrote: »

Got a good laugh that my posts lead some to think I'm in/a supporter of SCOVI.

Even if you were i wouldn't either hold it against you, nor criticise you for it. You're fully entitled to support whomever you wish.

My criticism is of the topic, not the persons involved.

Grizzly 45

BSA International wrote: »

Few individuals, with no realistic mandate from the majority of shooters, talking to DOJ as if they have.

Oh I'm sorry I didn't realise we needed approval and "mandates" from the Irish shooters...:rolleyes::rolleyes: Was under the obvious illusion that we all had a common enemy of politicians and organisations trying to ban our firearms and that while we might have different approaches to getting to the common goal of trying to keep our firearms no matter what type they are. Silly me!!!

Also BSA, why is it biting you in the ass, as to what FUNI does? No one is sticking a gun in your face and telling you to join, and I presume as you said yourself you are only in the NARGC so target shooting and relevant isn't really their thing, and they only were involved in it because of their policy of having to defend their members who had pistols at the time in courts. By rights that should have been NASRPC's circus from the get-go. But strangely isnt even today for some reason.
So whats the problem?

Cass

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Oh I'm sorry I didn't realise we needed approval and "mandates" from the Irish shooters...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

You don't, but it does help. Some groups have been created by the people that take part in the sport so have a mandate by their members while others have set up a group on their own initiative and garnered support through their actions eventually gaining a mandate. FUN is, by all accounts, an established EU group and if they get a mandate via the second method (creation, then support) then that is fine.

However a mandate is not as important as the actions. May not be explaining my thoughts well here, but what i'm getting at is if a group works on shooting sports or a single individual then so long as their results are beneficial to shooting sports i don't care about mandates or affiliation.

So whats the problem?

I don't think there is one. People may be on guard with recent posts and their tone, but i believe the questions asked are genuine and without ulterior motives.

tudderone

BSA International wrote: »

I was following this thread and FUNI came up and I asked for and got the info I looked for so thanks for that.

Back to browsing for me. Got a good laugh that my posts lead some to think I'm in/a supporter of SCOVI.

We don't know if you support SCOVI or not, if you are or not, don't go anywhere and tip on. But anyone who appears to support an org, thats about as popular as the nazi party in Israel is going to attract heat.

BSA International

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Also BSA, why is it biting you in the ass, as to what FUNI does? No one is sticking a gun in your face and telling you to join, and I presume as you said yourself you are only in the NARGC so target shooting and relevant isn't really their thing, and they only were involved in it because of their policy of having to defend their members who had pistols at the time in courts. By rights that should have been NASRPC's circus from the get-go. But strangely isnt even today for some reason.
So whats the problem?

What bites me is the history of small groups and individuals talking to DOJ and making a balls of things.

Fact check : It was NARGC money that got pistols returned long before they backed many other similar cases. NARGC also provide comp fund cover through a number of ranges. Not many shooting organisations have the financial resources NARGC have incl. NASRPC.

BSA International

tudderone wrote: »

We don't know if you support SCOVI or not, if you are or not, don't go anywhere and tip on. But anyone who appears to support an org, thats about as popular as the nazi party in Israel is going to attract heat.

Beats me how you came to the conclusion that I do from my posts tbh.

I'll be looking in and posting as and when.

tonysopprano

BSA International wrote: »

Of FUNI? If so how, considering what Grizzly said earlier?

Here it is.

BSA International

tonysopprano wrote: »

Here it is.

Not FUNI as Grizzly said it's for FUN, based in Poland, aimed at EU level not Ireland.

tonysopprano

BSA International wrote: »

Not FUNI as Grizzly said it's for FUN, based in Poland, aimed at EU level not Ireland.

Last time I checked, Ireland was in Europe, but as things happen so fast, I may be wrong.

Also, all legislation that has affected Irish shooter post 2009 has come from the EU, so why should this not be where we concentrate our efforts?

BSA International

tonysopprano wrote: »

Last time I checked, Ireland was in Europe, but as things happen so fast, I may be wrong.

Also, all legislation that has affected Irish shooter post 2009 has come from the EU, so why should this not be where we concentrate our efforts?

My point is you stated it was a membership card for FUNI. It's not. It's for FUN.

tonysopprano

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

You are in it already.:D
Not giving you a short answer, but if you are in an EU country and a gun owner you and the millions of others of us are potentially represented by FUN on the EU level.

This is what I replied to.

Also, if I join FF/FG/Labour/Greens, do I then have to join every cumann or local org?,

or does membership of the overseeing party not count (like this brown animal droppings : Fine Gael, officially Fine Gael, is a liberal-conservative and Christian-democratic political party in the Republic of Ireland.

BSA International

tonysopprano wrote: »

This is what I replied to.

Also, if I join FF/FG/Labour/Greens, do I then have to join every cumann or local org?,

or does membership of the overseeing party not count (like this brown animal droppings : Fine Gael, officially Fine Gael, is a liberal-conservative and Christian-democratic political party in the Republic of Ireland.

To use your example. To be a member of FG you join a local cuman not the grouping they align with in EU parliament.

Your reply implied you are a member of FUNI which you are not.

BattleCorp

Cass wrote: »

By the by i'm not a member, representative nor affiliate of any of the above named groups so have no horse in this race.

You have guns, so this horse race is important to you. Especially when so called representative organisations are shooting your horse in the knees.

BattleCorp

tonysopprano wrote: »

Last time I checked, Ireland was in Europe, but as things happen so fast, I may be wrong.

Also, all legislation that has affected Irish shooter post 2009 has come from the EU, so why should this not be where we concentrate our efforts?

Not quite. The Irish government have gold-plated EU legislation. One particular example is where EU legislation permitted Member States to allow semi-auto centrefire mag capacities greater than 10 rounds for target shooting but Ireland completely banned them.

Other legislation off the top of my head includes new(ish) regulations for gun dealer premises etc. Open to correction here but the lockbox thing for transporting ammo isn't an EU thing either.

But you are right, the greatest danger to us is from the EU, but our own aren't far behind.